Pro-Football, Inc. v. Harjo

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• finding economic prejudice if a trademark registration were cancelled where a defendant had invested money in marketing and brand development
• explaining that mere delay insufficient for application of laches defense
• describing prejudice to include “prejudice at trial due to loss of evidence or memory of witnesses” when finding laches barred plaintiff’s trademark claim
• the first five Redskins trademarks were published and registered in 1967, 1972-1974, 1976, and 1978; the “Redskinettes” mark was published and registered in 1990
• “The courts’ treatment of the tacking question is commensurate with their treatment of the related issue of ‘likelihood of confusion’ in the trademark context.”
• “[P]rejudice is equated with investment in the trademark that theoretically could have been diverted elsewhere had the suit been brought sooner.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).